You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

you and marmalade, it would seem, are bent on painting people adding other perspectives to this conversation (ones that don't fit your world view) as greedy, closed-off, short-sighted bastards.

Did you see that Simulated? We're bent on painting them as greedy, closed-off, short sighted bastards, even while he paints us unemployed welfare recipients who hate successful people because we don't fit his world view.

I guess it never crossed his mind that gainfully employed people who admire success could be liberals. I mean, I guess he's never heard of, oh say, the Kennedys.

Did you see that Simulated? We're bent on painting them as greedy, closed-off, short sighted bastards, even while he paints us unemployed welfare recipients who hate successful people because we don't fit his world view.

I guess it never crossed his mind that gainfully employed people who admire success could be liberals. I mean, I guess he's never heard of, oh say, the Kennedys.

i'm not talking about anyone or everyone, i'm talking about you and what you've said in this thread and others.

i work with, i study with and i live with plenty of *thoughtful* liberals.

no, it's turned into a semantics debate because you're the very thing you claim you hate: a black and white type of person. this is clear from your posts.

but, if you're comfortable being so large a hypocrite then i suppose you can win by default. i will gladly hand you that trophy.

But I'm not black and white. That's just how you've pegged me in your imagination, as this person who "hates success." This estimation is the result of your own limited thinking, and not my actual personality.

i'm not talking about anyone or everyone, i'm talking about you and what you've said in this thread and others.

i work with, i study with and i live with plenty of *thoughtful* liberals.

Nope. You said people like me and Simulated. Check your own post, man.

What's a thoughtful liberal? Someone who will listen to you yammer on about the superiority of the upper class without arguing with you?

I'm tolerant of my Ron Paul worshipping friends IRL, too. Hell, I even wrote an entire paper about libertarianism and weighed the pros and cons of it. That's what disgusts me so much about it - the fact that I'm actually educated on the subject. If I were truly ignorant of libertarian principals, I might be more tolerant of it. As they say, ignorance is bliss!

Usually so-called "professionals", their children, and their neighborhoods, are somehow a better influence, I'd agree with that based on my experience. There's more tendency to learn how to behave in a way that will lead to a non-degrading existence, less emphasis on brute force and strenght as a means of survival in society, overall less stress and a mindset which is more oriented towards learning, discovering new things, being open to the world, etc.

I've lived in a "bad" neighborhood when I was a kid, up to 10, then I moved to a "good" one afterwards, and I could notice the difference in mindset.

Said that, I don't believe that the upper you go the better the influence is. I've got two really rich "friends" (wouldn't call them that way) and they're kind of arrogant, money-wasters, and racist. It seems like there's a quadratic relationship between quality of socialization and wealth, where either too little or too much of it impairs the ability to relate to people on a growth-oriented level.